Peak-hour avoidance

The case study within the policy domain of mobility is concerned with projects intended to reduce peak-hour congestion through encouraging drivers to avoid peak hours. Such projects supplement the existing research with comprehensive

information about the factors which determine their success. The participants (those participating in peak-hour avoidance trial projects) are predominantly male, aged between 29 and 59, married with children, with a graduate level (or equivalent) education, owning more than one vehicle (usually not a lease car), and in full-time employment at a permanent location to which they drive by a set route with regular high congestion. Further examination of the peak-hour avoidance policy using the Behaviour Analysis Framework offers some points of departure for more effective policy, i.e. further reduction of the number of journeys made during peak hours, with a concomitant increase in those made at other times of day.

Location

The most obvious locations in which to recruit motorists willing to alter their behaviour (i.e. to avoid peak hours) are those in which congestion is particularly high, whereby personal interests are therefore most marked (high problem awareness). Regular users of high-congestion routes are identifi ed using automated registration plate recognition systems, and are contacted directly by letter. (This approach calls for attention to be devoted to personal privacy.) Because only a relatively short stretch of road is designated as the ‘target area’ for peak-hour avoidance, it is easier for potential participants to fi nd valid alternative routes (greater self-effi cacy). The presence of bus and cycle lanes in city centres places the emphasis on the importance of alternatives to car use (including peak- hour use) and can be made permanent.

Time vs circumstances

The majority of those who took part in the peak-hour avoidance trial projects were already in the habit of travelling at the beginning or end of the peak period. They were therefore required to make only a slight adjustment to their regular behaviour in order to meet the criteria for peak-hour avoidance. Motorists who usually travel at the height of the peak hour were less well represented. This is partly because ‘peak hours’ were defi ned very broadly, meaning driving outside those times demands a major alteration of behaviour. This group will derive greatest benefi t if the circumstances which require them to travel at the height of the peak hour are made more fl exible. In part, this will entail altering or dispensing with certain perceptions, assumptions and habits (that of the standard 9-to-5 working day, for example), although behaviour is often determined by actual circumstances: school hours, the availability of childcare, working hours (both those of the individual concerned and their partner) etc. It will be useful to talk to families, schools, and employers – perhaps through existing partnerships to encourage peak-hour avoidance – to investigate means by which the external circumstances can be adapted to allow peak-hour avoidance or to achieve better distribution of traffi c fl ows throughout the day. This process may also reveal obstacles raised by the corporate culture of employer organisations.

Role models

There are many people who already avoid peak hours every day. They may do so expressly to avoid congestion, because they live close to their place of work, or because they prefer to cycle rather than drive. Information regarding exact numbers or motives is not available: further research is required. If this information is then widely publicised, a strong social norm will be established, and those who display sustainable behaviour can be held up as role models worthy of emulation. In its role as employer, the government (at all levels) can set an example.

Technology

There is relatively strong opposition to the idea of fi tting cars with registration systems. This is partly due to reasons of privacy, but linking a named individual to a specifi c vehicle also creates opportunities for fraud (e.g. using a second vehicle for peak-hour journeys). Existing roadside camera systems appear to be a reliable and inexpensive alternative. And given the widespread use of smartphones, it should also be possible to apply app-based technology rather than installing a ‘black box’ in the car itself. This would also open up the possibility of personalised feedback and information about alternative routes or public transport options. Those willing to adopt such systems could be rewarded with, say, an up-to- date sat-nav app for which any usage charges refl ect the level of sustainable behaviour.

Parking management

Restricting the number of parking places available and increasing fees is a relatively inexpensive way of reducing traffi c volume in the city centre, including peak-hour volume. Providing fewer parking places does not impinge directly on personal freedom of choice. It does however make driving into the city a far less attractive option. The remaining parking places should have good access to alternative public transport services in order to facilitate transferring.

Simplicity

Peak-hour avoidance projects should present potential participants with a clear and positive proposition. Many of those who did not take part in the trial projects report that they did not understand the proposition or the objective. It is therefore necessary to start with a more positive picture than is currently the case. ‘Peak- hour avoidance’ is a negative or at best neutral formulation, yet there is much to be gained in terms of time, predictability, comfort, accessibility, and reduced costs. If people are offered a way in which to save time and money while enjoying greater comfort and knowing exactly when they will arrive at their destination, many will eagerly seize the opportunity. An element of competition might even enhance this.

Concluding remarks

Policy intended to encourage peak-hour avoidance has been extensively tested and refi ned as necessary. It has proven its effectiveness and will implemented on a wider scale. Nevertheless, it has proven very diffi cult to reach the ‘hardcore’ peak-hour motorists, who seem very set in their ways. Are they unwilling to change their behaviour? Are they unable to do so? Is it just too diffi cult to plan ‘smarter’ alternatives? Rewards, avoidance plans, and feedback will only be effective if the circumstances which determine this group’s mobility patterns are made more fl exible. The societal debate should devote greater attention to the interplay between factors such as accessibility, working hours, school hours, employment participation, and the life-work balance.